The genuine arguments of the council, with the opinion of the Court of King's Bench, on cause shewn, why an information should not be exhibited against John Stephen James, Joseph Clarke, Esqrs. Ralph Aldus ... William Augustus Miles, James Sparks, and Thomas Leigh; for a riotous conspiracy, ... to deprive Charles Macklin, ... of his livelihood; ... By a citizen of the world

Table of contents

- [frontispiece]

- [titlepage]

- PREFACE.

- THE EDITOR'S ADDRESS TO THE TOWN.

THE GENUINE ARGUMENTS, &c. Trinity Term, 14 GEO. III. B. R. SATURDAY, June 11, 1774. THE KING, On the Prosecution of CHARLES MACKLIN, AGAINST JOHN STEPHEN JAMES, Esquire, and Others.

THE Rule Nisi obtained in this Cause was read, and is as follows, viz.

Monday next after five Weeks from the Feast Day of Easter, in the 14th Year of King George the Third.

Middlesex.

It is ordered, That the fifth Day of next Term, be peremptorily further given to John Stephen James, Joseph Clarke, Esquires, Ralph Aldus, Gentleman; William Augustus Miles, Thomas Leigh, and James Sparks, to shew Cause, why an Information should not be exhibited against them, for certain Conspiracies, Riots, and Misdemeanors, upon the Undertaking of the said Defendants, that if such Information should be granted, they will appear thereto immediately; and it is further ordered, that all Affidavits on Behalf of the said Defendants, be filed four Days before the next Term.

On the Motion of Mr. Wallace.

Lord Mansfield,

Chief Justice. Who shews Cause?

Mr. Wallace.

I shew Cause for Aldus.

Mr. Bearcroft.

I shew Cause for James.

Mr. S. Davy.

I shew Cause for Sparks.

Mr. Mansfield.

I shew Cause for Clarke.

Mr. Norton.

I am for Miles.

Mr. Buller.

I am for Leigh.

Mr. Dunning.

Your Lordship is fully apprized of the Charge, and of the Nature of the Answers, here are six Defendants, and six Council.

Lord Mansfield.

I see they defend as not knowing each other, and taking the Charge separate.

Mr. Serjeant Davy.

It is so—and it is sworn in the Affidavits, they never saw one another, and were as much Strangers to one another, as I am to them.

Lord Mansfield.

There is a Charge against the Man who brought the Body into the House—Let him begin.

Mr. Buller.

That Man was in Ireland at the Time the Rule was granted, and is not come back.

Lord Mansfield.

Then he don't shew Cause; have they served him in Ireland.

Mr. Dunning to Mr. Buller.

You, upon his Behalf, then enlarged the Rule against him; it was enlarged upon his Behalf.

Lord Mansfield.

That is enough.

Mr. Buller.

I mentioned there being a Probability of his coming Home, and therefore I enlarged the Rule as to him, otherwise it would be impossible for him to appear, he being in Ireland long before the Rule obtained it was a Slip—There is an Affidavit of his then being in Ireland.

Lord Mansfield.

Mr. Buller says it was a Slip, if it was enlarged; as he had then an Affidavit, that Leigh was in Ireland, at the Time the Rule was granted; what do you say to that Mr. Dunning?

Mr. Dunning.

My Lord, I am not satisfied there was any such Slip—I am not satisfied there was any such Affidavit—If your Lordship observes, the Rule was enlarged by Mr. Wallace for three, he being Council now for one; and it was enlarged by Mr. Buller for three, he being now likewise for one; at that Time there was no Distinction made between them; the Rule was to be enlarged for all.

Lord Mansfield to Mr. Buller.

You must bring an Affidavit of the Fact, and make a special Case to have it argued, why this general Rule should not prevail against Leigh among the rest?

Mr. Butler.

There is no Affidavit of Service upon him—they could not serve him.

Lord Mansfield.

Then why did you enlarge the Rule?

Mr. Serjeant Davy.

I had no Brief in the Business, at the Time the Gentlemen refer to—In the last Term I had a Brief brought me, to shew Cause for Leigh and Sparks—I was astonished to find, when I had read it quite through, that there was nothing said of Mr. Leigh, or on his Behalf, as there was an Affidavit by his Wife of his Absence—Upon looking into the Rule, and finding it enlarged generally, I enquired, and did not understand any Body was particularly Council for Leigh, at the Time the Rule was enlarged.

Mr. Davenport.

Mr. Wallace enlarged the Rule to this Term, for Miles, Clarke and Aldus; and Mr. Buller for Leigh, Sparks and James.

Lord Mansfield.

It certainly was so.

Mr. Buller.

We can prove it was a Mistake—A Slip.

Mr. Dunning.

I apprehend it was no Mistake of Mr. Buller's, but of the Instructions brought to him.

Lord Mansfield.

He must have had Instructions to enlarge the Rule, as to those three.

Mr. Dunning.

I heard Mr. Serjeant Davy say just now, that his Brief instructs him to defend Leigh and Sparks.

Mr. Blake.

I sent a Letter to Mr. Leigh to inform him of it, he has not returned me an Answer—I have an Affidavit of his being out of the Kingdom, before the Rule was granted.

Mr. Macklin.

My Lord, That Leigh was in London when the Rule was served can be proved.

Mr. Blake.

We will put the whole upon that Mr. Macklin, if you please.

Mr. Dunning.

Mr. Macklin will be so good as to recollect where we are—Your Lordship sees what a Situation we should have been in—we should have lost the Vacation, which might have been employed in serving him—the enlarging the Rule upon his Behalf, subjects him to stand this Day and shew Cause; and if what has been already done is not to be taken for Servic, he never will be served.

Lord Mansfield.

They don't deny it was enlarged with regard to him, and meant to be enlarged upon his Part. Mr. Buller says candidly and fairly, he thought Leigh would have been over, and that he got it enlarged upon that Supposition.

Mr. Serjeant Davy.

Certainly I can shew no Cause for Leigh.

Lord Mansfield.

Are you all afraid of beginning, can't you agree who shall begin.

Mr. Bearcroft.

My Lord, I am not afraid to begin for Mr. James, the first in the Rule—In Point of Form, I ought to begin—In Point of Substance, I ought to be the last; for Mr. James has very little to do in this Business, in Proportion with some of the rest; but as he is brought upon the Stage in this Character by Mr. Macklin, he must perform his Part, and when the Court come to see his Behaviour, if they don't dismiss him with Applause, they will dismiss him at least without any Censure.—In order to understand Mr. James' Case, (since Mr. Macklin's Affidavits have not been read) it is necessary for me shortly to state what they contain upon this Charge, and it is material to attend to the particular Times, in which James is charged to be active in this Business. Mr. Macklin, and his Friend Mr. Kavenhuller Skinner say, that upon the 13th of November last, Mr. James, together with Mr. Aldus an Attorney at Law, was very violent, at the Head of a Party, in the two Shilling Gallery of Covent Garden Theatre; that they and their Party were the chief Persons who made the Disturbance; and there is this particular Charge against James, that he insisted a Mr. Smith, one of the Actors of the said Theatre, should perform the Part of Macbeth, which was to have been exhibited that Evening. Then Mr. Macklin and Mr. Skinner say likewise, that upon the 18th of said November Mr. James appeared again at the said Theatre, in Concert with Mr. Aldus and Mr. Miles, in Consequence of a Conspiracy together, and that they made a violent Riot; and it is expressly charged that James, among others, called upon Mr. Macklin to kneel down upon the Stage, and ask Pardon,—These are the Charges against Mr. James, for whom I am concerned, with some general Allegations to inflame; and Mr. Macklin asserts in his Affidavit, that he, believes the sole Cause of his Discharge from the Theatre, was occasioned by, and owing to these riotous Proceedings. I have an Affidavit of Mr. James, which, if I am not very much mistaken, totally exculpates him from any Thing of the Sort, charged By the Information in this Cause—though perhaps Mr. James was not so perfectly quiet, as he could now wish he had been, yet your Lordships will find, upon his Affidavit, that he did nothing more than is done every Day, when an Auditor does not like an Actor—he tells, you he was there, when Mr. Macklin himself does not introduce him—he has no Reluctance in telling how often he attended the Exhibition of Macbeth, and the whole of his Conduct while there—he tells your Lordship, that he went there upon the 6th of said November, when he is not charged with being there—he says he went in Company with his Wife, that may satisfy your Lordship, he meant to be quiet, for to procure Quiet at Home, he took his Wife with him, and went into the two Shilling Gallery; he did not mean to make a Riot, having his Wife with him; and it might be well if every Person's Wife was as quiet as Mr. James's. But your Lordship will find there was another lady, a Lady Macbeth, who was not so quiet in this Business, for she thought proper to act in the Character, her Husband was that Night to perform, therefore she was not quite so quiet—and her Husband, instead of performing the Character of Macbeth, chose to exhibit a great Part of his own Character.—Instead of going on with the Play, he produced a vast Number of News Papers, with which he was disposed to act his Part in the Cause, and appealing to them was his Method of acting, till Mr. Dunning took the Character from him, who will act much better for him, if he will let him alone; thus the Cause was taken from the Audience, which seemed to be an Accusation thrown out against Macklin of saying, that a Mr. Reddish had hissed him; it seems Mr. Macklin appealed to the News Papers, and charged Mr. Reddish and Mr. Sparks with having hissed him. This Charge Mr. Reddish and the other denied in the public Papers, by Affidavits sworn before my Lord Mayor, or some Justice of the Peace. Mr. Macklin was angry, that he had thrown out a false Charge, and in order to exculpate himself was prepared with Papers, when he came upon the Stage, and was going to enter upon his Exculpation, and that produced the first Riot.—Most of the Audience disapproved of Mr. Macklin's Proceedings in this Business, and tho' it was his own Appeal to the Public, yet he did not chuse to have Mr. James and the others shew their Disapprobation by Hissing, which is the usual manner upon such Applications, either Hissing or Clapping; that was all that passed upon the 6th of November; then upon the 13th, the Time when it is charged, that Mr. James was at the Theatre, the Question then arose, whether Mr. Macklin had not been extremely wrong in this false Charge upon Mr. Reddish and others, and it was the Judgment of the House that he had, and Mr. James was in Truth one of those judges who was of Opinion it was improper Behaviour, and Mr. Macklin was called upon for some Concessions, for that he had been in the wrong.—Mr. James says he sat in the two Shilling Gallery, and that he, with the rest, called out for a Concession, for this bad Behaviour of Macklin's, which he had no sooner done, than a Lady, who sat some little Distance from him, started up and immediately struck Mr. James—This Signal it seems was to be given, together with the Expression the Lady made use of, "this is one of the Scoundrels who hissed," or to that Effect, upon which a Man started up and seconded the Lady, being close by her, and immediately struck Mr. James; upon this a Scuffle and a third Person arose, and struck Mr. James; this seems to be rather unfortunate for Mr. James, for if he did wrong, he was very well punished upon the Spot, without having the Punishment of this Court—they tumbled him between two Benches, and one or two got upon him, and beat him: Your Lordship may conceive the Consequences might have been very serious to him—He says, he had a Suspicion who this Virago Lady, that begun the Business, was, he supposed her to be a Relation of Mr. Macklin's, and he defined a Friend of his, who appeared in the Gallery, to follow this Lady Home, to see who she was; he found out the House she went to, which had the Name Macklin upon the Door. Every one believes the Lady, who begun this Assault upon Mr. James, was Mrs. Macklin, Wife of Mr. Macklin, who makes this Application. The present Question is, whether or no there was a concerted Design and Conspiracy between these Parties to hurt Mr. Macklin. This would be a bad Business indeed, and every Person must feel it so.—But Mr. James denies the Charge in these Terms, viz. that he had not the least Knowledge before of Mr. Aldus, or any of the rest, and absolutely denies, that he called upon Mr. Smith to perform in the Character of Macbeth, instead of Mr. Macklin, or for any Purpose whatsoever—and though Mr. Macklin has been too hot and hasty in charging Mr. James with making use of those Expressions, they are material Expressions perhaps, and material to be denied, for they enter into the very Purpose, supposed to be a Preface to the Proceedings of the rest of these Persons, by calling upon Mr. Smith to perform the Part of Macbeth; this he fully denies.—He is charged with hissing, hooting, and abusing every Person near him; but he puts a Negative upon this by his Affidavit, wherein he shews the Usage he received from the Hands of Mrs. Macklin and her Friends.—He says, the next Morning he waited upon Mr. Coleman, the acting Manager of the Playhouse, to procure an Interview with Mr. Macklin, in order to find out from whom he received those Blows; that he did not mean to prosecute, with respect to her, but would put up with the Blows he received from her. Mr. Coleman took a great deal of Pains to procure a Meeting between Macklin and James, to have the Matter explained. But your Lordship will find that was diligently avoided by Mr. Macklin, tho' he had full Notice.—Now supposing for a Moment, that Mr. James himself was at all to blame, will your Lordship grant an Information upon the Application of this Mr. Macklin, from whose Wife and two of his Friends (for those Men must be taken for his Friends) if Mr. James had behaved at all ill, he receiv'd ample Punishment from their Hands, such as I have before represented; and when Mr. Macklin refused to meet him or to assist him in his Enquiry after these Persons. I should submit, that would be a Ground for refusing this Information to Mr. Macklin. The Court requires, when an Application is made to them for an Information, for a Riot or a Breach of the Peace, or other bad Behaviour, that there should be nothing of the Sort on the Part of the Person who makes the Application. Another Charge against Mr. James is, that he roared out for Mr. Macklin to kneel down upon his Knees, and that he menaced Mr. Macklin with his Stick or Cane; that is a material Charge, and material to be denied, that is denied in the fullest Manner in the World. He absolutely denies in Words, that he roared out to Mr. Macklin to down upon his Knees, or menaced Mr. Macklin with his Stick, as charged in the Affidavit—for Deponent positively swears he had no Stick or Cane whatever with him that Evening; that is material, the Truth is no more than this; they must have taken some other Person to be him—Now with respect to the Conspiracy between these Parties, to do the Mischief, which is the material Part, there is the most absolute and positive Denial that can be in any Form of Words—Mr. James says, he was there upon the 18th of November, that he was a perfect Stranger to William Augustus Miles, James Sparks, Joseph Clarke, Ralph Aldus, and Thomas Leigh, or any or either of them, to drive the said Mr. Macklin from the Stage, nor had any Meeting with any Person or Persons whatever for that Purpose, nor desired any Person to expell the said Macklin from the Stage—All this Deponent wanted was for him to answer for his Conduct relating to those Charges against Mr. Reddish and Mr. Sparks, and that was the whole of the Business, and denies that he was in any Conspiracy, or knew of any Conspiracy against Mr. Macklin—That with respect to himself, he has been sufficiently ill used, and more than sufficiently punished at the Time, through the Behaviour of the Wife of Mr. Macklin, for if there was any Cause of Revenge, she and her two Assistants fully revenged the Cause, while my Client was down between the two Benches; therefore, my Lord, I conceive this is a full Answer to the Charge, and that your Lordship will not make the Rule absolute against Mr. James.

Mr. JAMES's Affidavit read in Court.

The Affidavit of JOHN STEPHEN JAMES, Esq sworn the 28th of May, 1774.

SAITH, That on the 6th of November last, to the best of Deponent's Knowledge and Belief, as to the Time, Deponent went in Company with his Wife to Covent Garden Theatre, to see the Tragedy of Macbeth, wherein Mr. Charles Macklin was to perform the Part of Macbeth, being the third Time of his appearing in that Character; saith, They were in the two Shilling Gallery, and that before the beginning of the Play Mr. Macklin came on the Stage, with a large Parcel of Papers in his Hands, which he began to read, the Purport of which was to prove, that Mr. Reddish and Mr. Sparks had hissed him the first Night of his performing said Part of Macbeth; saith, That on hearing same read, it appeared to Deponent, that there was no sufficient Proof of either said Reddish or Sparks hissing, neither did Deponent think a mere Relation sufficient to contradict the Oaths of said Reddish and Sparks, which they had respectively made, denying that said Reddish had hissed on the 23d of October; Copies whereof were inserted in the News Papers, and Deponent did therefore disapprove of said Macklin's Behaviour, by the common Mode of Hissing, and faith nothing more particular passed that Evening, and the Play was heard through, during the Performance of which Deponent applauded or hissed, as he approved or disapproved.

Saith, That on 13th of same November Deponent went to said Theatre, to see the Tragedy of Macbeth, being the fourth Time of Mr. Macklin's performing said Character, and sat in the two Shilling Gallery; saith, that as said Macklin had not produced the positive Proof of Reddish and Spark's hissing, as he pledged himself to the Public to do Deponent, as well as many others, call'd out for such Proof or a Concession. And saith, that on his calling out for such Proof or Concession, a Woman some little Distance from Deponent, started up and struck Deponent, and said, "This is one of the Scoundrels who hissed," or used Words to that Effect; on which a Man, who appeared to be sitting next her, immediately started up, and also struck Deponent, who returned his Blows, and continued so to do, till his Companions took him away.

Saith, That some little Time after said Fray happened, but during the Performance of said Play, as Deponent was endeavouring to find out said Man who had struck him, a Gentleman, whom Deponent has not the least Knowledge of, pointed out the Man, who had struck him, and told Deponent, if he was looking for the Man who had struck him, that was him, or Words to that Effect; saith, upon his going up to the said Person who had so struck him, another Man immediately rose up and struck Deponent, which Blow was followed by several others, from several persons who were sitting near said Man, who had first struck Deponent, and Deponent was knocked down between the two Benches, and some Person or Persons stamped on Deponent's Breast, and other Parts of his Body; and saith, if his Friends who went with him, and some other Gentlemen, had not interposed and prevented said Persons from continuing their ill Usage to him, the Consequence would have proved very dangerous to Deponent.

Saith, that immediately after he had been so released from the disagreeable Situation he was in between the two Benches, he went into the Passage of the said Gallery, where he was addressed by a Gentleman, who informed him he was a Patentee of said Theatre (and whom Deponent believes, and has been since informed, was Mr. Dagge) and desired Deponent to give him his Address, which Deponent did, and then said he had heard Deponent had been used very ill, and pointed to a Person, who he said was the Constable of the Theatre, and had Orders from him to take out any Person or Persons, whom Deponent should fix on, who had used him ill.

Saith, he then went into the Gallery, with the Constable, to search for the first Man who had struck Deponent, but could not find him; and on his coming into the Gallery, with the Constable, he observed the Woman who had struck him rising from her Seat to go out, and as Deponent was following her, with a View of finding out who she was, Deponent met Mr. Lucas of Charing Cross, who was then coming into the Gallery, on which Deponent desired Mr. Lucas to watch said Woman Home, which he accordingly did, and said Lucas returned to said Theatre in about twenty Minutes, and informed Deponent, that he had followed her into a House in James Street, Covent Garden, with the Name of Macklin on the Door, and therefore Deponent at that Time verily believed, and doth now believe, that said Woman who struck Deponent first, and whom said Lucas followed to said House, on the Door of which House was wrote Macklin, to be Mrs. Macklin, Wife of said Charles Macklin;

Saith, that being so ill used in the Theatre, he was obliged to quit same during the Time the fifth Act was performing.

Denies being at the Head of, or forming any Party or Parties against Mr. Macklin's performing said Character of Macbeth, on said 13th November, and absolutely denies having at that Time the least Knowledge of Mr. Ralph Aldus; and also denies, that he called on Mr. Smith to play said Character of Macbeth, instead of said Macklin, or for any other Purpose whatsoever; and also denies, that he hissed, hooted, or abused those, who desired him to be quiet.

Saith, that on the Monday Morning following, he waited on Mr. Coleman, the acting Manager of the said Theatre, to request of him to use his Influence, to obtain an Interview with Mr. Macklin, in order to prevail on Mr. Macklin to use his utmost Endeavours to find out the several Persons, who used Deponent ill the preceding Night; that Mr. Coleman sent his Servant to said Macklin, to obtain such Interview, which Servant brought back for Answer, that said Macklin was not at Home; that said Coleman promised Deponent to speak to Macklin, and to procure a Meeting with him, and that he would give Deponent Notice of such Meeting; that in the Evening of same Day, he received a Note from Mr. Coleman, informing him, that soon after Deponent left said Coleman's House said Macklin came, and refused to have any Meeting or Conversation with Deponent on the Subject; in which said Note from Coleman to Deponent, was inclosed one from Macklin to Coleman, informing said Coleman, that said Macklin refused to meet Deponent.

Saith, that on or about 17th of said November, Deponent did cause to be inserted in the Morning Chronicle, a Letter addressed to said Macklin, in the Words following (that is to say)

Sir,

I call upon you thus publicly to declare your Reasons, for refusing to meet me, at Mr. Coleman's or elsewhere, as likewise who the Gentlewoman is, who first struck, and then set a Russian to assault me, on Saturday Evening last, in the Gallery of Covent Garden, she being afterwards watched into your House, in James Street, Covent Garden: This I must insist upon, as I intend then to leave you to the Stings of your own malevolent Heart, and the Resentment of the much abused Public.

I am, Sir, Your very humble Servant, J. S. JAMES.

Saith, that said Macklin took no kind of Notice of said Letter, either in a public or private manner, and saith, that receiving no Answer from Mr. Macklin, he went to said Theatre on the 18th of said November, with two Gentlemen only, who had dined with him that Day, at his Lodgings in Bridge Street, and went into the Pit, with an Intent to see the Play of the Merchant of Venice, in which Play said Macklin, was to perform the Part of Shylock, and, likewise publicly to repeat the Question to Macklin, whether he knew the Woman or Man who struck Deponent on 13th November in the two Shilling Gallery as aforesaid; but the Confusion and Noise on Macklin's Appearance on the Stage, Deponent presumes prevented said Macklin from hearing said Question.

Positively denies, that he roared out to Macklin, to down on his Knees, or that he menaced said Macklin with his Stick, for he had no Stick or Cane of any kind whatsoever with him, during that Evening; and saith, that on 18th November last, he was a perfect Stranger to Miles, Sparks, Leigh, any or either of them, and never had any Conversation with all or any of them, or with Clarke or Aldus, or either of them, to drive said Macklin off the Stage, nor did Deponent enter into any Combination, Conspiracy, or Agreement with any Persons whomsoever, for that Purpose; nor did Deponent say or express any Desire t expel said Macklin from the Stage, for all that Deponent wanted was an Answer to his Question, and an Apology for said Macklin's Conduct towards the said Reddish and Sparks.

Mr. Dunning.

The Woman going into the House, with the Name of Macklin over the Door, is no Proof, your Lordship sees, that she was Mrs. Macklin; on the contrary, she is found out to be another Person.

Mr. Murphy.

It is a Lodging-house, where there are several families.

Mr. Buller.

My Lord, I am of Council likewise on the Part of Mr. James; the only positive Charge is, that on the 18th of November last, he stood up in the Pit and with Vociferations called to Mr. Macklin to kneel down, and menaced hin with a Stick; as to the rest, respecting the Charge upon the former Day, it only extends to Belief: Mr. Macklin has sworn and upon his Belief refers to another Fact which really is not so, as in the Affidvit it appears to be sworn, by another Person's Affidavit, that James insisted tha• Smith should take Mr. Macklin's Par• Mr. Macklin's Affidavit does not say, tha• James was the Man who called upon Mr▪ Smith to act Mr. Macklin's Part; and then is no other express Charge, but that on th• 18th of November, against James, which i• his calling out to Mr. Macklin to knee down, and the menacing him with a Stick or Cane. All the rest of the Affidavit is nothing to Mr. James, the greatest Part of it is only setting out Mr. Macklin's Merit. Mr. James appears from the first Time to be insulted by People who came there, and the Woman who first began the Disturbance, was traced to Mr. Macklin's House; he had Notice, and was called upon to give an Account, if he knew who the Persons were who had used James so ill—But what was Mr. Macklin's Conduct: he refuses to meet him, and gives no Anwer whatsoever, which was not an implicit reason, that he did not know who they were; if he did not know who they were, as I think he must know, he might have so informed Mr. James, but he had reason to suspect who they were. Mr. Macklin is said to have first appealed to the Public; I should have thought his Discretion would have dictated to him to abide by their Opinion, let it be what it would; but with respect to his present Application to a Court of Justice, he is not intitled to the least Favour or Countenance whatsoever; for he brought his Complaint in the most public and solemn Manner he could, against two People in the same Profession with himself, and which Complaint, if proved must have been attended with all the fatal Consequences to those two Gentlemen that Macklin seems to apprehend now the Complaint was made by him to the Audience, they heard it with Patience the Complaint they found was not true but appeared to be false; I don't know any more generous Conduct for any Man to have adopted upon this Occasion, where there was a false Charge brought against two Men, which, as public Men, must have been attended with very injurious Consequences to those Gentlemen, i• found true, than where it was found false to express Horror upon the Occasion It appears, that all that Mr. James desired was to have an Account of those People who had used him ill; James had shew his own Opinion, which he had a righ to maintain, and he was justified in Hi•¦sing to shew his Disapprobation; for whe• this Motion was first made, before it was furbished up with this Ground of Conspiracy, which has been since added, at that Time the Court said there was no Ground for an Information. Now they have foisted in the Ground of Conspiracy, which they have not made out. It is denied, in the most positive Terms, respecting the Stick being held up in the Pit; it is denied, in the most positive Terms, that James knew any thing of the other Defendants; upon the contrary he went as a single Man, neither has he entered into any Conspiracy or Combination whatever. Mr. Macklin might have put an end to it, if he pleased, even after his having made his Appeal to the Public, in the Manner he did; when he was called upon by Mr. James, he might have answered him, by giving him an Account of those Persons from whom he had suffered so much, when he was knocked down between the Benches, where he was kicked and stamped upon, which might have been attended with fatal Consequences to his Person; but when called upon, Mr. Macklin refuses to give him any Answer, or meet him.

Upon the whole it appears there is no kind of Conspiracy in the Conduct of Mr. James, and therefore no Ground for this Information.

Lord Mansfield.

Who is in Support of the Rule?—Go on with them one by one.

Mr. Wallace.

Will the Court give Judgment one by one?

Mr. Dunning.

Yes, and execute them one by one. If your Lordships please to favour me a few Words upon this Case, so far as the Rule affects the Person, for whom the two Gentlemen have been shewing Cause: Your Lordship will recollect, what has been stated from the Affidavits, containing that Charge which is supported, not by Mr. Macklin only, but in the material Parts of it, by two or three other People, Mr. Macdonnel and his Wife, and Mr. Kavenhuller Skinner.

Mr. Bullet thought good to suppose these People did not swear positively to the Fact, or at all to it, and that Macklin speaks to Belief only of the Facts that passed on the 13th of November last. Your Lordship, by referring to those Affidavits, will correct that Misinformation; for nothing can be more positive to the Facts sworn to, by the Affidavits, of those people, whose Information Mr. Macklin speaks. Of the Facts sworn to upon the 13th of November last, Macdonnel and his Wife give this Account; that one of "the Persons who seemed to be at the Head of those who opposed Macklin's performing the Character of Macbeth, and spoke most particularly, was one James—as he called himself, whom they believed to be John Stephen James, of Bridge Street, Westminster, said James so publicly declaring;" these Mr. Buller thought good to represent to your Lordship, as Persons speaking from Information and Belief, and to suppose Mr. Macklin spoke from Information and Belief respecting the Person; it is charged to be James by Macdonnel and his Wife, but their Affidavit hardly wants Positiveness, in the manner of making it, three People swear positively, Mr. Macklin making the fourth—Mr. Macklin believes James to be the Person from whom he received that Treatment, and the Reason for his believing it is, he has been fo informed by those, who now prove it, concurring with his own Apprehensions.

The Court will now say what is fit to be done upon the Truth of the Case, when the Truth is understood; Mr. Buller thought good, as did Mr. Bearcroft, who went before him, to say Mr. Macklin, who gave certain Provocations, which, by their Argument, they would refer to him, in Consequence of which Mr. James, was intitled to act in the manner he did, and was not so culpable as the rest, he having received very ill Treatment from the Hands of a Woman, and some Friends of Mr. Macklin's. If your Lordship looks at the Affidavit of the Gentleman, in his own Exculpation, and of Mr. Lucas, your Lordship will see upon what Ground these People were warranted, in presuming that this Woman was Mrs. Macklin. The Ground is this; by the Directions of James, Lucas followed this Woman to the House, upon the Door of which, was the Name of Macklin; Mr. Macklin lives in that House, Part of which belongs to him, upon the Door of which, leading to his Apartments, is his Name, the other Part of it is a Shop; in the House there are various Lodgers, and to what Part of the Hoause she went, they have hot thought proper to tell; she might go to a Lodger there, or might be a Lodger herself; or possibly never heard or knew any thing at all of Mr. Macklin, otherwise than as being a Lodger in the House; and disposed to think Mr. Macklin was ill treated. But of this Woman being Mrs. Macklin, there is no Evidence, nor do they affect to say she is in any Way so, as to induce your Lordship to credit, that such is their Belief. Your Lordship will give me Leave to say, that this Woman, so said to be Mrs. Macklin by Mr. James, was not Mrs. Macklin, and it was so far from being possible for James so to believe her, that he charged a Woman of the Name of Macdonnel with being the Woman who had so treated him; he Mr. James therefore, so far from being of that Belief, stands under the Predicament of having found out his Mistake, if ever there was a Time, that he really thought so, for this same Mrs. Macdonnel is the same Person he fixed upon, as having given him that Usage, and is not Mrs. Macklin, out Mrs. Macdonnel, a Person who has nothing to do with it, but the Fact of being a Witness in this Case; all the Argument founded upon it will be removed, by shewing there is such a Misrepresentation. Then my Lord it remains to shew, that the Charge is neither disputed or denied; I take Leave to say so, notwithstanding the Gentlemen have said it is both disputed and denied; these Facts, supposing them to be true, constitute the Ground of the Charge against this Person.

Your Lordship will give me Leave to presume that, of which these is undoubted Evidence, and which no Person is prepared to controvert, viz. with respect to the enlarging of the Rule for Mr. Leigh, Mr. Buller was not ill advised, it was not a Slip upon the Occasion, though the Gentleman says so, but he has it from the Attorney, giving him Instructions to enlarge it, without which he would not have enlarged it, therefore it was no Mistake of Instructions, but the Gentleman acted agreeable to the Point of his Instructions; the Attorney, in my Apprehension, perfectly understood what he was about, when he gave those Instructions; I now, understand it, and if the Gentleman had not advised he should be defended, they would have given him better Instructions. Nobody will doubt the Charge, when there is a Proof of a great Number of People, speaking at a great Number of Times and Places, about it; and Mr. Leigh has been seen to give Orders, and to apply that Force, and collect it, which will clearly be found to be the Truth; and when not denied, it must be taken for granted; and if that Time never comes of its being denied, it appears in Proof beyond a Doubt, there existed in Somebody a determined Purpose to drive this Man from the Stage; and though the Gentleman chose to speak of Mr. Macklin's Apprehensions being groundless, Mr. Macklin at that Time, as well as the Time I am now pressing his Interest for the Consideration of the Court, if he was in a Situation to apprehend any thing, must apprehend he would be discharged; and now that he has been discharged, if he is not apprehensive of being discharged, it is certain he is not yet restored, and not under the Apprehension he shall be restored. With respect to their own Safety, for which no Imputation falls upon them, if the Managers of the Theatre attend to such Behaviour as this, it will for ever prevent the Restitution and Restoration of this Man, to what the People have driven him from. That some People are answerable for that, I beg Leave to presume, in this Business; how far those People are accessary to that Design, and instrumental in carrying it into Execution, and for the Purpose of obviating the Suspicion of Collusion and Conspiracy, the Circumstances are singular enough. When I state Mr. Macklin to be an Irishman, he will not be affronted with me, what those others are I cannot learn; I have not made any Inquiry about it; but I find a little Irish Blood has found its Way into their Veins, or those that advise or appear for them to Day; when the Rule was enlarged, they appeared by two distinct Classes of Council, each representing Three, and to Day the Partie• are Six, and have six Council; and the• they forget there stands my Friend, the common Attorney to the whole Six.

Mr. Blake.

It is not so; I am not Attorney for the Six, I am Attorney for Mr. Leigh; and Mr. James's Friend desired me to do Business for him.

Mr. Dunning.

I don't blame Mr. Blake for setting me right; on the contrary, I thank him; then it seems there are six Persons appearing by two Attorneys, and not one.

Mr. Ashe.

I am attorney for some of the others.

Mr. Dunning.

Then I beg Leave to stand again to rectify my Mistake; we shall grow accurate, by Degrees, no doubt; then there is one Attorney for three Parties, represented by three Council; and three Attorneys instructing another Council, to be for the three other Parties. The corrected Case then is this; three Attorneys employ one Council, upon the Behalf of three Parties, who choose to be understood, as Parties entirely unconnected with each other; another Attorney employs three distinct Council, representing three Parties, because they chuse to shew those three Parties totally unconnected with each other; therefore, as far as respects the Point of Connection, is to be discovered by the Evidentia rei of the Case, which your Lordship sees, with respect to Mr. James, the present Subject in Consideration, is, that he is understood by his Council, to have acquitted himself altogether; and they have gone particularly through the Charge, in Point of Observation, in order to contradict it.—Give me Leave to go through the Parts of the Answer; in the first Place, your Lordships are told, that this Gentleman went to the Theatre, for the peaceable Purpose of seeing the Play; perhaps if he had been so very peaceable as my learned Friend, he would have had no Occasion to have taken his Wife with him, to keep him in Order; I wish with all my Heart his Wife could have done so the next Time of his going there; but I cannot tell whether it was, that this Gentleman grew so unruly, that his Wife chose to keep out of his Way (it would have been well for the rest of these Defendants, if they had done so too) or whether it was for other Purposes: It seems he returned to the Playhouse; but with what View? Not out of Curiosity, that being fully satisfied the first Night; for then Mr. James was clearly of Opinion, that Macklin was incompetent for performing the Character of Macbeth; the Gentleman might have supposed himself invested with Authority, to form a Judgment upon the Merits of Mr. Macklin, as a Performer, and, in Company with his Wife, whose Criticisms concurring with his, Macklin's Performance of the Character was considered, by them, as worth Nobody's while to go and see, It was odd, after he had passed this Judgment, that he should chuse, whenever Mr. Macklin came on again, in that Character, to go and see him. This Case is too strong, and no Person can give this Gentleman Credit for saying, he came on Purpose afterwards to see the Play; and when Mr. Macklin came upon the Stage, in different Characters, in the Play in Shylock, and in the Entertainment, in Sir Archy Macsarcasm; I take Leave to suppose the Town agreed, that in these Characters Mr. Macklin always had capital Merit; if there is any Merit in those Characters themselves, they are understood, by all the World, to have been exhibited with all their Advantages by Mr. Macklin; however, if it was Mr. James's Purpose to share in the Pleasures, what drew him to see Macklin in the Characters of Shylock and Sir Archy Macsarcasm?—He was in fear, as he thinks fit to tell us, before Mr. Macklin began the Character, that they would not let him go on, because they wanted Something else; they wanted an Apology, and some Explanation, and God knows what; and that which I shall presently go more minutely into the Enquiry of—that Something—therefore it was, and not seeing him in Sir Archy and Shylock, clearly which drew Mr. James to see him, in those Characters, any more than when he went to see him in Macbeth. Nobody can suppose nor will Mr. James wish to be understood that seeing, applauding, or condemning the Character, were among the Object that drew Mr. James's Attention to the Play-house. It seems, however, Mr. Jame having satisfied your Lordships these were not his Purposes, has left us no Doubt what they were; for he has had the Goodness to explain them. He says, the first Time, viz. the Sixth of November, there was a Talk about Reddish. His Affidavit states, that, "it appeared to this Depotent, that there was no sufficient Proof, of either the said Samuel Reddish or James Sparks hissing; neither did this Deponent think a mere Relation sufficient to contradict the Oaths of them, the said Samuel Reddish and James Sparks; and this Deponent did therefore disapprove of Macklin's Behaviour, by the common Mode of Hissing."—What other Purpose, if any, brought him there that Night? Your Lordship sees how soon he forgot—for it seems he hisses the Actor to prevent his going on; and why? Because there was not sufficient Proof to satisfy this self-created, self-erected Judge. He takes upon himself to act upon a Charge he had nothing to do with; he had no Connection with either of the Parties; but he, in pure Generosity, as Mr. Buller tells us, was inclined to take upon him to judge of those Merits, he supposed himself called upon to try, though his Proceedings, in Fact, had no Relation at all to the Merits of the Performance—But Mr. James was so inattentive to the Pleasure of the Company there, as to think himself authorized to disturb what they might like.

Lord Mansfield.

I am very well satisfied, as to Mr. James—You need not go any further—I think what Mr. Buller alluded to, was right; if the Application went therefore in the Way he meant it, to be sure, this Court would not encourage Complaints of the Disapprobation or Approbation of acting upon a public Theatre; being shewn in a manner in which every Part of the Auditory has a Right to shew it—But if from Malice, Ill-will, or Resentment, a Number of People are ungenerous enough to take Advantage of the Situation a poor Actor is in, being at their Mercy upon the Stage, to deprive him of his Bread, and insult him, not upon any Offence arising out of the Play, but from Malice and Conspiracy against the Person who is the Actor, to strip him of the Means of Living, that is a strong Ground of Action, which may be brought by him—I rather wished he had— I hinted and recommended to him to have brought an Action—Besides the Injury done to him, it is most indecent to the Public, and a Shame to the Police of the Kingdom—With Regard to Mr. James, he don't deny some of the principal Parts of the Charge, and upon his own Affidavit, he gives sufficient Ground to shew with what View, after the Sixth of November, he went there, and with what Principle, and for what Purposes—As to the Affidavit of Macdonnel and his Wife, he hardly gives an Answer to any Part of it—It is the clearest, fullest, and most express Charge, and he hardly gives an Answer to any Part of that Affidavit—It is very remarkable in that Affidavit, which •e don't deny, Mrs. Macdonnel swears throughout, he took her for Mrs. Macklin, and challenged her with being Mrs. Macklin, and all along considered her as Mrs. Macklin—He was so outrageous, so vio •ent and so mad, that he challenged Men •nd Women—These are strong Words of his Affidavit, which are not answered •y him.

But taking it upon his own Affidavit, which is the fairest Way—He goes there upon the Sixth of November; whether he went for Amusement, or other Purposes, he don't say; but he goes on the Sixth of November; he says, before the Beginning of the Play, Mr. Macklin came upon the Stage, with a Parcel of Papers in his Hands, which he began to read, the Purport of which was, to prove Mr. Reddish, a Performer of Drury Lane, the first Night of his performing the Part of Macbeth, had hissed; and upon hearing the same read, it appeared to him, there was no sufficient Proof of either said Reddish or Sparks hissing; neither did he this Deponent think a mere Relation sufficient to contradict the Oaths of them, the said Reddish and Sparks, which they had respectively made, whereby they denied it and he says, he therefore shewed his Disapprobation of Macklin's Behaviour, by the common Method of Hissing, and he says he hissed that Evening—There it rests for that Night—But how comes it upon the Thirteenth of November, that he came there? With what View, and in what Company does he come there? Manifestly for Vengeance, not to see the Play—He says he went, it being the fourth Time of Mr. Macklin's performing the Character—He says, that as Macklin had not produced any positive Proof of Reddish and Sparks Hissing, as he had pledged himself to the Public to do, he this Deponent, as well as others, called for such Proof or Concesson; and upon that, a Squabble happened with a Woman (Macdonnel's Wife) whom he swore to be most outrageous—As to Proofs and Concessions, Macklin had nothing to do with it, Macklin was wrong in saying any Thing about it; and much more so, after they had made their Affidavits, to take Notice of it.

But he goes on Purpose, not to see the Play, but to call for Proofs and Concessions—Who was to take them? Was the Court? Or the Pit? Or the Upper Gallery? They had not defined what the Concessions were to be, or to whom to be made—Then James is outrageous, and makes all this Work for want of Proofs end Concessions, that he had no Business to go to the Play-house to ask for—Then he has made a Slip in one Thing, which I am sure he was not aware of—It is insisted, there was no Conspiracy—To be sure no Conspiracy—The other Persons joined in the Rule, have no Acquaintance with him—But when he comes to give an Account, he says, if his Friends that went with him had not done so and so, they should not have been able to have got the better; therefore it appears he went with a Body of his Friends, to demand Proofs and Concessions, by Vociferations and Noise in the House—After this he wants to speak with Macklin—I suppose Macklin took Care not to meet him—He was afraid to speak to him, as he was so boisterous, but to Mr. Coleman he desires to be excused giving him any Satisfaction about this Woman at all—In Consequence of this Mr. James sends a Challenge, and publishes it in the News-papers—He writes to him in this Manner.

‘Sir, I call upon you thus publicly, to declare your Reasons for refusing to meet me at Mr. Coleman's, or elsewhere, as likewise who the Gentlewoman is, who first struck, and then set a Russian to assault me, on Saturday Evening last, in the Gallery of Covent Garden Theatre, she being afterwards watched into your House, in James Street, Covent Garden. This I must insist upon, as I intend then to leave you to the Stings of your own malevolent Heart, and the Resentment of the much injured Public.’

Then for fear the Court should not be able to perceive it was a Challenge, James takes Care of this, for he declares in his Affidavit, that Mr. Macklin did not dare to answer him, either in a public or private Manner.

However, this is not a Conspiracy. He says he is not acquainted with the particular Persons that might be there—There might be Scores or Hundreds concerned in it—Mr. Macklin singled out, as well as he could, those he was able to give Evidence of—James says he did not enter into a Conspiracy to drive Macklin for ever from the Stage—But still he should give Proofs or Concessions before he acted again.

Now as to a Conspiracy, it is not necessary to prove a parole or written Agreement, in order to make a Conspiracy; if persons concur in Acts to do the same Thing, that is Evidence to be left to a Jury, whether it is or is not a Conspiracy? You all remember the Case of the Ghost-Several Persons were there convicted of a Conspiracy. I believed what they themselves said, when they moved the Court for a new Trial, that they had not a parole Communication, much less a written Agreement; but they all concurred in the same Imposition upon the Public, by setting up this Ghost. I said upon the Trial, if the Jury thought they all concurred towards the same End, and upon any bad or improper Principles, took Par• in setting up that Ghost, that it was no• necessary to prove either a parole or written Agreement to do it; and upon th• Motion for a new Trial, the Court was o• that Opinion.—But what is this Case James denies he entered into a Conspirac• to drive Macklin from the Stage—But wha• did he want? All he wanted was a• Answer to his Question, and an Apolog• for Macklin's Conduct towards Samu•• Reddish and James Sparks—What had 〈◊〉 •o with Samuel Reddish or James Sparks? Who made him the Champion of Reddish and Sparks? Yet he is desirous it should appear that he was not acquainted with them, or they with him; but still he goes to get this Apology or Answer, and will not suffer the Play to go on, but insults the Audience. Acting in this manner was very malevolent to Mr. Macklin. With respect to James therefore, let the Rule be made absolute. Go on with the next.

Mr. Norton.

I am for Mr. Miles, and shall trouble your Lordship with such Answers to the Charge against him, as occur to me.

I apprehend there is very little Proof against Mr. Miles—He is charged with being present in Covent Garden House upon the Eighteenth of November; that he hissed, was noisy, and outrageous, with a great Number of other Persons in the Pit—He is likewise charged with having wrote something upon Paper, and throwing it out of the Pit upon the Stage—What the Contents of the Paper were, is not stated; so I presume your Lordships will not consider it to be so stated—Then that he had a Conference with Mr. Woodward, and after that Woodward retired. I think that is the whole of the Charge made upon Mr. Miles. He is not charged with being present in the Evening Mr. Macklin acted Macbeth—I understand there was a strange Disturbance upon the Eighteenth of November; but he is not charged with any Conspiracy, except what could be inferred from expressing his Disapprobation at the Time of Acting, by Hissing—No Suspicion can properly fall upon Miles—On his Part I have an Affidavit, by which he declares he went to the House upon the Eighteenth of November, for the Purpose of seeing Mr. Macklin act the Part of Shylock, and the Part of Sir Archy Macsarcasm, in an Entertainment; in which Parts I understand he has always acquitted himself with great Applause—He says the Audience was very noisy, at the Time of drawing up the Curtain, and he, not approving altogether of Mr. Macklin's Conduct, joined in some Degree with the Noise of the House; so far he admits, but says he did it merely because he thought Mr. Macklin ought, after what he said, to make some little Concession to the Public—That he did not do it with any View or Intention of driving him from his Profession—In short, that he was in no Combination, and had no Malice against Macklin. Thus it stands upon Mr. Miles's Affidavit. I apprehend therefore, with Deference to your Lordships, from the whole of the Case, it appears there was no Malice, or Intention of Malice—That Miles went there as a Spectator—That what be did was no more than expressing his Disapprobation of Macklin, as every Person in a Play-house generally does, if they dislike a Performance—That he considered himself as having a Right to do it, and if any Consequence arose from it, by that Behaviour, Mr. Macklin may have his Remedy by Action—But I trust, in such a Case as this, your Lordships will never let an Information go against him.

Lord Mansfield.

Is the Letter set out in the Affidavit?

Mr. Norton.

No, my Lord, we say nothing at all about it.

Mr. MILES's Affidavit read.

The Affidavit of WILLIAM AUGUSTUS MILES, Gentleman, sworn the 30th of May, 1774.

SAITH, That he want into the pit of the Theatre Royal Covent Garden, on the Eighteenth of November last, to see the Play of the Merchant of Venice, and the Farce of Love a la Mode, advertised for that Night; and that on drawing up the Curtain, the Audience became very clamorous for the Appearance of the acting Manager, and incessantly called out for Mr. Coleman to come on the Stage; saith, that Macklin, habited in the Character of Shylock, came on the Stage, in Opposition to the general Sense of the Audience, and on being desired to go off, he peremptorily refused, and, in the most insolent Manner, advanced to the Orchestra, and stampt with his Feet, and continued on the Stage.

Saith, Deponent then understood be Resentment of the Audience against said Macklin, was occa•ioned by his bringing Charges against some Persons, with whom Deponent is, and ever was unacquainted, and which Deponent understood, and thought appeared to be false and groundless, and for engaging some Persons to interrupt the Sense of the independant Part of the Audience, on the Night of the Thirteenth of November.

Saith, That he was then informed, that several Persons were by hired People most cruelly beat, and otherwise ill treated, for giving their Opinion on the Merits of said Macklin, in the Character of Macbeth; and finding, by much the major Part, if not the Whole of the Audience, on the Night of the Eighteenth of November last, incensed at the Outrage offered by said Macklin to the Public, and insisting on some Concession being made, Deponent did as an Individual, give his Sentiments to the same Purport, and without being connected, or in the least acquainted, either directly or indirectly, with any of the abused Parties; but merely from a Conviction, that some Apology wa• due from Macklin to the Audience, fo• the Insult they had received, and th• groundless Charge he had made on particular Persons.

Saith, That he did not, by any Words or Signs, give any Signals to th• Audience whatsoever, nor did he threaten or menace any of the Actors, an• on his Oath saith, he was a perfe•• Stranger to Leigh, Sparks, James, Aldu• and Clarke, on the Eighteenth of November last; and that he neither hired no• engaged, nor was concerned in hirin• or engaging, directly or indirectly, and Person nor Persons to hiss the said Macklin, nor was Deponent concerned or engaged in any Combination, Conspiracy, or Agreement, with any Persons whomsoever, to hiss, or otherwi•• molest or interrupt the said Macklin i• his Performance on the Stage.

Lord Mansfield.

Miles does not deny the Charges; he does not deny his being accessary to driving Macklin from his Bread.

Mr. Murphy.

It was by Mile's written Order, that Macklin was discharged.

Lord Mansfield.

Upon the Eighteenth of November, Miles was at the House; he took Part in the Quarrel; they all went on Purpose; therefore let the Rule be absolute, as to him.

Mr. Mansfield.

I am for Mr. Clarke; so far as respects him, from the State of Macklin's Affidavit, the Charge is, that upon the Eighteenth of November (the Affidavit not pretending Clarke to be at Covent Garden Theatre upon any former Occasions) that he sat in a Box one Story high, over the Stage; that when he made his Appearance, he was saluted with the waving of Sticks, and a Noise—Then it is charged, that Clarke made a Signal to the Audience; next, that there was a His •ing, and crying off, off—That he gave several Signals, which, from their constantly producing the same Effect, Deponent Macklin apprehends were pre-concerted Signals, which Clarke sometimes made with his Hat, and sometimes with 〈◊〉 Piece of Wood he had in his Hand, co •ered with red Cloth; with which he menaced Macklin, and called upon him to kneel down and ask Pardon. Now in that Mr. Macklin is unconfirmed, and it is denied by Clarke. Next it is charged, that he cried off, off, and that he beat the Scenes most furiously with the Board that he threw a Note upon the Stage, and ordered the Actors to go off; that he roared out Coleman, Coleman, and desired him to come upon the Stage; that Clarke appeared to be one of those Persons to whom this Riot and Behaviour was imputable. This is the whole of the Charge against Clarke. Macklin lumps him with the several other Persons, Leigh, Miles, and the others; and says, he understands it was a Combination by all these Persons, for discharging him from the Stage, whence he was afterwards discharged: Mr. Clarke is a Gentleman of Surry, lives at Moulsey, and is a Man of Fortune: He gives this Answer; that he never was at the Theatre, either of the four Times, when Macklin acted Macbeth. It might be owing to his Misfortune, his not seeing the Character of Macbeth shine in Mr. Macklin, an• no doubt it did, if he had had the Pleasure of seeing him act in that Character, I dare say it would have so recommended Mr. Macklin to him, that he would not have been induced to do as he did. He went to see Mr. Macklin in the two Characters of Shylock and Sir Archy Macsarcasm; he denies he is at all conscious of making any Salutations to the Audience, or that the Audience made any Return to them; he tells your Lordships, It is true, that he took up a Piece of Board with a red Cloth, which was in the Box, and that he made as much Noise as any Body in the House; that he struck it against the Scenes, and against the Side of the Wainscot of the Box; that soon after the Curtain was drawn up, there was a prodigious Cry of off, off; that soon after Mr. Macklin came upon the Stage in the Dress of Shylock; that there was then some Talk or Dispute between Macklin and some Gentlemen in the Pit; that Macklin retired, and came in his own proper Dress; that there was then a great Cry of off, off; that Macklin was called out to, by a great Number of the Audience, to make good the Charge against Reddish and Sparks, for some Offence against the People; and Clarke tells your Lordship, that finding a Majority of the Audience in this, he did concur in saying, off, off, and hissing, and striking the Board against the Scenes and Box, finding a Majority of the Audience calling to Macklin to submit and beg Pardon, he joined with the rest. That he then sent a Note to Mr. Coleman, as Mr. Macklin states; he threw the Note upon the Stage, which was a Note to Coleman, to beg he would come upon the Stage to make Peace; to desire Macklin to quiet the Audience, which he was told he might, if he would beg their Pardon; he says, Mr. Coleman did not come upon the Stage; and then Mr. Clarke tells your Lordships, he went away and left the House. One of the Affidavits states, that he was upon the Stage afterwards, and Mr. Coleman came there; but he denies that, and says he went to Drury Lane directly.

As to preconcerting of Signals, he does, in express Terms, swear, he never preconcerted Signals with any Person whomever—That those Gentlemen, who were taking an active Part and Lead in the Business, stood in the Pit—one was represented as holding up a Paper, Mr. Sparks, I believe, and one was threatening with a Stick, they were taking different Parts—he says, that he had no more to do with it, than there being a Noise of crying off, he did the same, and struck the Place with the Board—that he not only had no kind of Preconcert with them at all, but was a total Stranger to them, and never spoke to any one of them in his Life, nor to Mr. Macklin, upon any other Subject; the last Thing he did, before his going to Drury Lane Theatre was, he met Miles as he was going out, who said something to him, but he does not know what he said—he denies having had any Connection with any Person whomsoever—he admits he certainly bore a Part, he hissed, and knocked the Board he had in his Hand, which he had taken out of the Balcony, against the Box, in which he was—he says, that he had no malevolent Design against Macklin, that he wished Macklin would come and beg Pardon; with which the People would be perfectly satisfied—If the Business of this Court is to consider, whether a Man hath acted with perfect Decency upon these Occasions, I could not acquit Mr. Clarke most certainly; but Mr. Calrke never conceived any Degree of Malice against Mr. Macklin at any Time; he had no Altercation with Macklin, he had no other Connection or Concern in the Affrays, than what he has submitted in his Affidavit, which, when your Lordships have heard read, you will find no Ground to involve Mr. Clarke in this Information if there is any, it must be upon the Ground of Conspiracy, on the Part of Mr. Clarke to do Macklin an Injury.

Mr. CLARKE's Affidavit read.

The Affidavit of JOSEPH CLARKE, Esq sworn the 20th of May, 1774.

SAITH on November 18, 1773, he went to the Theatre Royal, Covent Garden, to see the Play of the Merchant of Venice, and the Entertainment of Love a la Mode, and got to said Theatre before the Curtain was drawn up and sat in the Box, one Story high, over the Stage.

Denies, that to his Knowledge or Behalf that, on making his Appearance in said Box, he was saluted with three Chears, with waving of Hats, brandishing of Sticks, or that he received any Salutation whatsoever, with Acknowledgment and Satisfaction, or returned any Salutation made to him.

Denies, that as the Curtain was drawing up, he made any Signal, with his Hat, to the Audience, or any Thing else to make an Outrage of Hissing or Hooting, or to cry off, off, off.

Saith, that as soon as the Curtain drew up, and two of the Performers of the Play came on the Stage, a great many of the Audience in the Pit cried off, off, off, and the Players withdrew from off the Stage, and thereupon Mr. Charles Macklin, in the Dress of Shylock, came on the Stage, when some Altercation or Dispute arose between the said Macklin and some Persons in the Pit, when said Macklin went off the Stage, and took off the Dress of Shylock, and came on the Stage again, in his common Dress, when he was called upon by the Majority of the Audience, as Deponent believes, to make good his Charge against Reddish and Sparks, and to clear up some other Matters which he was accused with; but Macklin, as Deponent verily believes, desired further Time to make good his Charge against Reddish and Sparks, and to clear up such other Matters, with which he was accused; that thereupon Macklin was called upon, by the Majority of the Audience, as Deponent believes, to make his Submission to the whole Audience, by asking Pardon; which said Macklin refused to do, and said Macklin not making good his Charge against Reddish and Sparks, and not clearing up the Matters with which he was accused, and not making a Submission to the Audience, as was required, Deponent did, as did the Majority of the Audience, as Deponent believes, Hiss, and cry Off, off, off.

Admits he had a Board, or false Rail in his Hand, covered with red, which was loose on the Top of the Box, where he leant over, which Deponent believes takes off, and puts on, occasionally; and admits he made a Noise with said Board, by striking it against the Box and Scenes; but denies, to his Knowledge or Belief, he menaced or threatened said Macklin with the same.

Saith, that said Macklin continued obstinate in not making a Submission, and the Audience beginning to be more violent than ever, Deponent wrote a Note to Mr. Coleman, the Manager of said House, to desire he would come on the Stage, which Deponent thought would be the only Way to put an End to the Disturbance; but said Macklin refused to come, and Deponent thereupon went to said Coleman in the Green Room, and desired he would appear on the Stage, and inform the Audience, that whilst said Macklin lay under their Displeasure, that he should not appear again on the Stage, until he had made a proper Submission to the Public, or used Words to that Effect, and the reason of Deponent's so doing was, because he apprehended it was most likely to put an End to the Disturbance.

Saith, said Coleman still refusing to come on the Stage, Deponent immediately left said Theatre, and went to the Theatre Royal in Drury Lane.

Saith, he hath been informed and believes, that said Coleman did afterwards that Evening come on said Stage, and address himself to the Audience; and saith, he never preconcerted any Signals with William Augustus Miles, John Stephen James, Ralph Aldus, Thomas Leigh and James Sparks, or any of them, to be given by him, said Joseph Clarke, on said 18th of November, at Theatre Royal, Covent Garden. But, on the contrary, Deponent saith he was, before 18th of said November, and whilst the Disturbance was making in said House that Evening, a total Stranger to said Miles, James, Aldus Leigh and Sparks, and never had any Conversation with them, or any or either of them, touching said Macklin, or any Thing else, except that Deponent met said Miles by Accident that Night, as he was going behind the Scenes to the Green Room, to Mr. Coleman as aforesaid, who spoke to Deponent; but what he said Deponent can't recollect.

Saith, he never preconcerted any Signals, to be given by him, said 18th of November, at the Theatre Royal Covent Garden, with any Person or Persons whatsoever; and denies, to his Knowledge or Belief, he menaced said Macklin, with said Board covered with red as aforesaid, and denies he made any Signals with it to make a Disturbance, in said Theatre, said 18th of November; but admits he had said Board in his Hand, and struck it against the Box and Scenes, and made a Noise with it.

Denies, he called upon said Macklin, to kneel down and ask Pardon, but admits he cried off, off, off, which seemed to Deponent to be the general Sense of the Audience then present; and denies he did in Conjunction with Miles, James, Aldus, Leigh and Sparks, or any of them, or with any other Person, compel the Managers of said Theatre to discharge said Macklin from his Employ, Deponent having no such Wish, Desire or Intention; but verily believes, that if said Macklin had made a proper Submission to the Audience, the same would have been accepted, by the Majority thereof, which would have put an End to the Disturbance.

Denies, that he ever entered into any Combination, Conspiracy, or Agreement with said Miles, James, Aldus Leigh and Sparks, or any of them, or any other Person against said Macklin in order to discharge him from the Theatre, on said 18th of November, or any other Time.

Saith, he had not any ill Will against said Macklin, but was desirous, as he believes was the Majority of the Audience then present, that said Macklin should have made a proper Submission to the Public, as well on Account o• said Samuel Reddish and James Sparks as on Account of other Matters, which he was accused with.

Saith, he was not at the said Theatre the 23d or 30th of October last nor the 6th or 13th of said November when said Macklin appeared in the Character of Macbeth; and denies he was in said Play-House on the 18th of said November, when Mr. Coleman came on the Stage, Deponent having before that Time left the said House.

Lord Mansfield.

There is enough in Clarke's Admission to be sure; he joins with them most outrageously, because Macklin did not make out the Charge against Reddish and Sparks, therefore the Rule must be absolute, as to him.

Mr. Dunning.

It would be a Pity if the Standard Bearer did not make one with the Troop, when he held the Trophy; 〈◊〉 lifted up the Flag, which was the Flag of Death.

Mr. Wallace.

After hearing the Rules •our Lordship hath laid down (tho' I conceive upon Mr. Macklin's appealing to the Public, he had submitted to their Sen •ence) I shall not trouble the Court, on •he Part of Mr. Aldus; he went there up •n this Dispute about Reddish and Sparks, 〈◊〉 doubt, as well as many more; and af ••• Macklin's Appeal to the Public, they ••ought to make him appear in that, more ridiculous, than in any Character he attempted to play.

Lord Mansfield.

They certainly did so. If they had only whipt him a little, and mortified him, it would not have been so much; but when it is carried so far, as to advise the Managers to discharge him, and take his Bread from him, it is then carried too far; and I would advise them, now the Rules are gone, instead of the vast Expence it will be in going on, to make a reasonable Satisfaction and Composition, and to let Part of the Money that would go amongst you, Gentlemen, be applied towards that Satisfaction.

Mr. Serjeant Davy.

I am for Sparks.

Mr. Davenport.

Sparks is the Man that went to the Antelope Alehouse with Leigh to get a Party together.

Lord Mansfield to Mr. Serjeant Davy

Are you for Sparks and Leigh?

Mr. Serjeant Davy.

I am for Sparks.

Lord Mansfield.

With regard to Sparks, supposing him (I have not the Particulars in my Mind, but supposing him) to be charged as the greatest Aggressor, I think there should be no Rule against him Macklin was extremely wrong to call in Question, in that public Way, the Veracity of Sparks; therefore I think the Rule should not go, as to him.

Mr. Dunning.

Your Lordship will give me Leave to mention what the Charge is. It goes precisely to this Point; Sparks, in Concurrence with Leigh, hires People to drive Macklin away.

Lord Mansfield.

Supposing it ever so strong, Mr. Macklin was in the wrong, with regard to Reddish and Sparks, in appealing to the Public; and a Man who is in the wrong, should not come for the Interposition of this Court, against another Person, who is in the wrong.

Mr. Murphy.

I will tell your Lordship how that Matter stands, and then your Lordship will judge how far Mr. Macklin was wrong, in regard to Sparks. The Fact is, that Mr. Macklin was attacked the first Night, and upon his first Appearance in Macbeth. He had not been used to that Sort of Behaviour during forty Years, and was very much astonished what could occasion it—Three Persons informed him (one of whom hath now made an Affidavit) that Sparks and Reddish were the People who occasioned the Tumult in the Gallery the first Night—Then upon the subsequent Saturday (it was Upon a Saturday he first applied) Mr. Macklin finding all the News-papers, Day after Day, Morning and Evening, pouring out the most virulent Abuse upon him, calling him Murderer, Villain, and the most opprobrious Names of every sort, and Paragraphs desiring the Public to drive him from the Stage, if he ever appeared again; he went upon the Stage with a large Bundle of Papers, the Papers of a Week, (as I am informed, I was not there—but I think it is so upon the Affidavits) he said he had been long in their Service, and there was his Reward, pointing to the Bundle of Papers of the whole Week, which he held in his Hands, full of every Scurrility that could be inserted in News Papers, poured out upon him, and Paragraph's, desiring the Public to drive him from the Stage, and submitted to their Judgment, whether they would permit him to play the Characters that Night—that he had been informed Sparks and Reddish were the Persons who begun the Riot. Mr. Macklin agreed with me, that News Paper Paragraphs were odious, and it appeared to me not to be a desirable Way for Mr. Macklin to refute, even Reddish upon his Oath—he readily concurred with me; and as he could not get People to prove it upon Oath, he was to procure the Papers, and read the Proof on Saturday.

Lord Mansfield.

How dared Mr. Macklin attempt to prove a Perjury upon Reddish; he charged Sparks and Reddish in the News Papers with having hissed him.

Mr. Dunning.

I fancy your Lordship mistakes the Fact at present in Favour of Mr. Sparks; for the Point about which, these Parties disputed, was the Unsatisfactoriness of the Proof insisted upon; and the Fact to be decided by this singular Tribunal was, whether Mr. Reddish had hissed? Sparks adopts the Charge as far as respected him; but, says he, though I did hiss, which I have a right to do, yet, Reddish being an Actor, it is Matter of Imputation upon him; and I, as his Champion, will make good the Charge; the Point to be tried was, whether they were truly or falsely charged?

Lord Mansfield.

That don't vary it; he charges Sparks with hissing, and brings the Proof upon the Stage—charging both him and Reddish, and appeals in that way; that was wrong, he should have applied to the Laws of the Country; and if he would not, he shall not come here for an extraordinary Interposition—I go upon the Ground of Sparks's being more guilty than any, against whom the Rules are gone—that may be taken to the Grand Jury—but with regard to Leigh, the Rule must be made absolute, as it was enlarged for him; and the Rule must be discharged as to Sparks.

FINIS.

Immortal Shakespear! Child of Heaven & fire,

The more we sink him rises still the higher:

Ee'n thro' THIS Vehicle the Bard can pass

Like Meccas Prophet—mounted on an ASS.

THE GENUINE ARGUMENTS OF THE COUNCIL, WITH THE OPINION OF THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH, ON CAUSE SHEWN, Why an Information should not be exhibited against JOHN STEPHEN JAMES, JOSEPH CLARKE, Esqrs. RALPH ALDUS, Attorney at Law, WILLIAM AUGUSTUS MILES, JAMES SPARKS, and THOMAS LEIGH; FOR A RIOTOUS CONSPIRACY, FOUNDED In private premeditated Malice, to deprive CHARLES MACKLIN, one of the Comedians, belonging to the Theatre Royal in COVENT GARDEN, of his Livelihood; by forcibly compelling the acting Manager of the said Theatre, against his Will, to discharge the said CHARLES MACKLIN for ever there-from; formally and publicly, on the Stage of the said Theatre.

Homo sum, nihil humani a me alienum puto.
TER.

BY A CITIZEN OF THE WORLD.

LONDON: Sold by J. WILLIAMS, No. 39, Fleet Street.

MDCCLXXIV.

[Price One Shilling and Six-pence.]

PREFACE.

AS I consider myself (in the Meaning of my Motto) an humane Man, and that no Act of Humanity is a Stranger to my Heart; I could not resist a natural Impulse to publish the following Sheets; inasmuch as they will tend, I hope, wish, and believe, to remove the unjust Prejudices, that have been most wantonly and cruelly taken against a Man; and that too with an avowed Purpose, to represent him, as an "ancient outlawed Felon, who was said to have Caput lupinum, and might be knocked on the Head, like a Wolf, by any one who should meet him; because, having renounced all Law, he was to be dealt with, as in a State of Nature, when any one, who should find him, might slay him."

But as Mr. Macklin hath not renounced all Law, and as "now (to avoid the Imputation of the Inhumanity above complained of) it is holden, that no Man can kill such Outlaw wantonly or wilfully," he seems as well intitled to the Protection of the Law of England, as any other liege Subject.

If it was high Treason against the Majesty of the PUBLIC, for a poor, ignorant, insulted Player, deluded, by mistaking a British Audience, (from their Treatment of him) for Barbarians, hunting down a Beast of Prey, to become indignant, so indignant at such Treatment, and at not being heard in his own Defence; and to happen to be so far lost, in an unguarded Moment, in such a Scene; as to express an improper and imprudent Agitation of Mind, by Looks or Gesture; if such Deportment, in such a Situation, could, I say, be considered as high Treason; what must one think of Gentlemen, who, though liberally educated, and conversant in the Laws of their Country; yet, with these Advantages, and cool and dispassionate; after serious Reflection, and mature Consideration, should assert in the public Papers, that they had been "ill used, and robbed by Russians, Mr. Macklin's Friends, that they scarcely suffered them to escape with their Lives, and that Mr. Macklin was privy to the Cause of their Complaints;" and such malevolent Assertion be besides, unsupported either by Proof or Reason; but, on the contrary, alledged merely on own self-created Surmises, and the Charges made on Purpose to encrease the public Resentment against an unfortunate and much injured Individual. If nothing but a Dismission from all Employment, an utter Deprivation of Bread, could atone for the Player's presuming to doubt or disbelieve the equivocal[*] Affidavits of two ingenious Participes Criminis, solemnly declaring to the Public, that they did not hiss; What then, I say, can atone for Gentlemen riotously conspiring, (induced thereto from private premeditated Malice) to damn, without Redemption, an helpless, exposed Player, by Accusations of capital Felony, as false as they were public.

Macklin was most grosly and inhumanly abused, insulted, and proscribed; and had it not been for the Laws of England, would have been totally ruined. To them he hath appealed; they have heard his Complaint, and declare him entitled to Relief.

The Town give out, that a Player hath dared to dispute the undoubted Right of a British Audience, founded on immemorial Custom, to approve or disapprove any Actor or theatrical Exhibition, by the usual Mode of Clapping or Hissing. The Charge is denied; and it is only humbly contended, that the meanest Subject, even a Player, a Servant of the Public, or a Vagabond (who being liable to Punishment, is also intitled to Protection) hath a legal Right to be heard against being for ever deprived of his Livelihood; though such Attempt were made by the first Personages in the Kingdom, or by Majesty itself (if that were possible) and that Riots, Conspiracies, and Malice, are all odious to, and punishable by the Spirit, as well as the Letter, of the Laws of England.

Notes

*
I may safely swear in an extrajudicial Manner, (because no Perjury can be legally assigned on such false swearing) when I do not actually hiss, that I did not hiss; and I may as safely make a Noise so exactly similar to Hissing, in Point of Sound, as not to be distinguished from it; especially when such Attempt becomes necessary, for the Purpose of disturbing an Audience, distressing an Actor, answering a partilar End, or making a News-Paper Affidavit; in short, qui vult decipi, decipiatur.
↵

THE EDITOR'S ADDRESS TO THE TOWN[*].

THough I care not whether you approve this Publication or not, I have, however, been weak and foolish enough to endeavour to command your Attention. For, to address you in the Language of Friendship, you have appropriated nothing but the Defects of former Times; Trifles light as Air amuse your Infancy; Passions distract your Youth; you think yourselves wise, when at Years of Maturity, because your Folly then becomes more serious; and Dotage marks your old Age; you speak without Thinking, you act without Meaning, and you assume the Authority to judge, because you have the Power to pronounce: To conclude, I respect you much, but esteem you very little; for tho' you require Notice, you are not worthy Regard. These are my Sentiments of you. If you require others,

I am, &c. &c. &c.

Notes

*
The Reader will be pleased to observe, that I here speak of the Town, not of the Public; my opinion of whom is, that they are generous, candid, and merit all the Submission, Respect, and Disposition to please them, which the Players profess every theatrical Evening, and that, not by sawning or cringing, but by a proper Demeanor, arising from a sincere, conscientious, and grateful Acknowledgment of the public Indulgence, Favor, and Protection.
↵

Information about this book

Title statement

The genuine arguments of the council, with the opinion of the Court of King's Bench, on cause shewn, why an information should not be exhibited against John Stephen James, Joseph Clarke, Esqrs. Ralph Aldus ... William Augustus Miles, James Sparks, and Thomas Leigh; for a riotous conspiracy, ... to deprive Charles Macklin, ... of his livelihood; ... By a citizen of the world

Macklin, Charles, 1697?-1797.

Publication

Distributor

University of Oxford Text Archive
Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road
Oxford
OX2 6NN
ota@oucs.ox.ac.uk

ID [ota]

http://ota.ox.ac.uk/id/4056

ID [isbn10]

1106010558

ID [isbn13]

9781106010551

ID [TCP]

K040490.000

ID [BIBNO]

CW3310623453

ID [ECLL]

0187601100

Availability

Distributed by the University of Oxford under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

Source

— The genuine arguments of the council, with the opinion of the Court of King's Bench, on cause shewn, why an information should not be exhibited against John Stephen James, Joseph Clarke, Esqrs. Ralph Aldus ... William Augustus Miles, James Sparks, and Thomas Leigh; for a riotous conspiracy, ... to deprive Charles Macklin, ... of his livelihood; ... By a citizen of the world, Macklin, Charles, 1697?-1797.. [8],72p. ; 8⁰. London :: sold by J. Williams,. 1774.. [Citizen of the world = Charles Macklin?.] [Reproduction of original from the British Library.] [English Short Title Catalog, ESTCT40757.] [Electronic data. Farmington Hills, Mich. : Thomson Gale, 2003. Page image (PNG). Digitized image of the microfilm version produced in Woodbridge, CT by Research Publications, 1982-2002 (later known as Primary Source Microfilm, an imprint of the Gale Group).]

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2p5.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

This electronic text file was keyed from page images and partially proofread for accuracy. Character capture and encoding have been done following the guidelines of the ECCO Text Creation Partnership, which correspond roughly to the recommendations found in Level 4 of the TEI in Libraries Guidelines. Digital page images are linked to the text file.